Unbelievable moonbases and wrong science
11-05-2009, 12:55 PM,
#1
Unbelievable moonbases and wrong science
I've seen several different explanations for why channeled material has material that seems just plain wrong, or unbelievable.

One theory, from Don Elkins' book Secrets of the UFO, is that "UFOnauts" are telling the truth about their experience in some kind of alternate universe, alternate timeline, or different plane or density of reality than ours. Elkins speculated earlier in the book that densities co-exist because each has a different distance between the atomic nucleus and its electron shells. He described the situation in physics as similar to multiple TV transmissions which could be tuned in with a receiver.

Quote:George Hunt Williamson, an anthropologist of considerable reputation, began reporting UFO contact in the early ’50s. He published several books about his contactee experiences, none of which were seriously given credence or consideration by his peers. The books contain much that we still consider untrue: the UFOnauts had told Williamson that the Sun was not a “hot, flaming body” but a cool body, and that we had two moons, one a “dark” moon which was unseen. He was told, moreover, that the moon we already know about had an atmosphere and water. Obviously, none of these statements make sense.
But let us back up a bit and look at these statements again considering not our third density alone but also those densities which interpenetrate ours.
Since most of the UFOnauts are in a reality displaced from ours, it is quite possible that they are experiencing these described conditions. In fact, if the Williamson book, THE SAUCERS SPEAK!, is read keeping the physical and mental variants of these displaced realities in mind, the material makes quite a bit of sense.

A second possibility that Elkins described is that UFO's, for instance, are sometimes metaphysical and do not have physical reality in our experience; unless they choose to have it. If the point is to get attention while leaving open free will, sometimes the UFO's will deliberately choose just enough physical reality to remain ambiguous. The purpose is to provide an increased opportunity for people to draw their own conclusions based on faith. If I remember right, Handbook for a New Paradigm also discusses this concept.

A third theory is that reports about concepts such as moon bases are literally accurate in our own scientifically measurable reality, but are concealed by political conspiracies. This is a popular topic on the Internet these days, isn't it!

A fourth possibility is that "bad news" material is not true, but is an interjection by negative entities who use fear to build their own service-to-self hierarchies.

A fifth is that "bad news" is just one potential future outcome. If we have enough positivity as a species, the bad news won't happen.

A sixth is that the sources of the channeled messages are just plain confused, as if we looked out the window and thought a rustling tree branch was a person but nobody was there.

And a seventh is that the alleged channeling is a conscious or unconscious artifact of the recipient's confusion. If the channeler happened to watch Star Trek last night while eating curry, they might rant about pepper-powered phasers tonight. This in turn could either be a deliberate lie of a conscious manipulator, or some kind of mental illness of a hallucination. Secrets itself has quotes from UFO sources claiming that some human UFO reports are nothing but hallucinations without any meaning.

Each of these causes of "unbelievable" reports such as moon bases leads to a different interpretation. Some interpretations leave the sources as credible, some leave the moon bases as true, some both, some neither.

I don't have the relevant Ra citations at hand, perhaps someone else could add them here.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-05-2009, 04:50 PM,
#2
RE: Unbelievable moonbases and wrong science
Is this thread about hard-to-believe information in channeled material in general or in the L/L Research Ra contact in particular?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-05-2009, 08:12 PM, (This post was last modified: 11-05-2009, 08:29 PM by Monica.)
#3
RE: Unbelievable moonbases and wrong science
Maybe all of the above!

Since we live in a holographic UniVerse, we can find evidence to support whatever we choose to believe. I don't think that means it's necessarily part of the Collective Consciousness, but for us, it might work at that point in our lives.

I personally don't find the idea of moon bases any more far-fetched than anything else in the Law of One...and I certainly don't trust NASA to tell us the truth about everything. (Does that put me in the conspiracy theorist camp? Or is 'conspiracy theorist' just a label used by those whose heads are buried firmly in sand?)

Since the topic of moon bases was brought up, I did a search, out of curiosity, and found some articles and videos supposedly done by whistleblowers (ex-military, ex-NASA, etc.) and of course our own very dear Richard Hoagland...My point being that there are plenty of people out there who are not necessarily into the Law of One who find the idea of moon bases not so very far-fetched.

Regarding the science in general: Is anyone tracking the science in the Law of One to see which elements are getting validated in the mainstream world? What seems 'wrong' by today's mainstream science may very well be accepted by tomorrow's mainstream.

The idea of a Holographic UniVerse, for example...is now being recognized and discussed at prestigious universities.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-05-2009, 08:56 PM,
#4
RE: Unbelievable moonbases and wrong science
(11-05-2009, 12:55 PM)Questioner Wrote:  One theory, from Don Elkins' book Secrets of the UFO, is that "UFOnauts" are telling the truth about their experience in some kind of alternate universe, alternate timeline, or different plane or density of reality than ours. Elkins speculated earlier in the book that densities co-exist because each has a different distance between the atomic nucleus and its electron shells. He described the situation in physics as similar to multiple TV transmissions which could be tuned in with a receiver.
Regardless of the 'physics', this has the conceptual merit of being:
1. consistent with a veil being in place
2. consistent with information regarding differences in perception associated with both each entities unique perception of 'reality' based on how much 'channel intermingling' an entity is able to perceive.
3. consistent with the idea of oneness and non-oneness being an illusion.

(11-05-2009, 12:55 PM)Questioner Wrote:  A second possibility that Elkins described is that UFO's, for instance, are sometimes metaphysical and do not have physical reality in our experience; unless they choose to have it. If the point is to get attention while leaving open free will, sometimes the UFO's will deliberately choose just enough physical reality to remain ambiguous. The purpose is to provide an increased opportunity for people to draw their own conclusions based on faith. If I remember right, Handbook for a New Paradigm also discusses this concept.

Here is a related reference from llresearch transcripts [The Law of One, Book V, Session 84, Fragment 43]. The relevant portions are at the top and the last Ra comment, which in itself is interesting. Roughly stated, it seems that the way metaphysical experiences are consciously interpreted varies depending on the entity in question, the manner of which is the stuff of 'science-fiction'. i.e. if a being from another dimension were to appear in front of an entity who was in no way prepared for the event [i.e. violation of free will ... to choose to experience a veil (which includes veiling things like interdimensional beings ... and there I believe is the interesting fruit regarding the veil ...)].

(11-05-2009, 12:55 PM)Questioner Wrote:  A third theory is that reports about concepts such as moon bases are literally accurate in our own scientifically measurable reality, but are concealed by political conspiracies. This is a popular topic on the Internet these days, isn't it!
Paradox and mystery abound ... what to believe, what to believe ... or sometimes what not to believe ... always our choice ... the convenient information spoon fed by television, or that we find on our own ... The seeking is always interesting, and just a little maddening (especially when you accept surface truths too deeply without personal exploration) ...

(11-05-2009, 12:55 PM)Questioner Wrote:  A fourth possibility is that "bad news" material is not true, but is an interjection by negative entities who use fear to build their own service-to-self hierarchies.
And so ... the truth shall set you free?

(11-05-2009, 12:55 PM)Questioner Wrote:  A fifth is that "bad news" is just one potential future outcome. If we have enough positivity as a species, the bad news won't happen.
Positivity ... shared hope/belief [i.e. not armegeddon, but forgiveness, acceptance, equanimity, etc.?] :-)

(11-05-2009, 12:55 PM)Questioner Wrote:  A sixth is that the sources of the channeled messages are just plain confused, as if we looked out the window and thought a rustling tree branch was a person but nobody was there.
I think 500 monkeys banging on keyboards coming up with the entire works of shakespeare by accident would be almost as likely ...

(11-05-2009, 12:55 PM)Questioner Wrote:  And a seventh is that the alleged channeling is a conscious or unconscious artifact of the recipient's confusion. If the channeler happened to watch Star Trek last night while eating curry, they might rant about pepper-powered phasers tonight. This in turn could either be a deliberate lie of a conscious manipulator, or some kind of mental illness of a hallucination. Secrets itself has quotes from UFO sources claiming that some human UFO reports are nothing but hallucinations without any meaning.

Each of these causes of "unbelievable" reports such as moon bases leads to a different interpretation. Some interpretations leave the sources as credible, some leave the moon bases as true, some both, some neither.
This seems related to your first supposition above above, see reference.

Interesting...

Peace, Love and Joy as you desire it!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-05-2009, 10:09 PM, (This post was last modified: 11-05-2009, 10:29 PM by Questioner.)
#5
RE: Unbelievable moonbases and wrong science
(11-05-2009, 04:50 PM)βαθμιαίος Wrote:  Is this thread about hard-to-believe information in channeled material in general or in the L/L Research Ra contact in particular?

I started the thread because there was discussion by other forum members of some of this material from the Ra books in particular. If people would like to use the thread for a broader discussion, please feel free to use it in whatever way is helpful.
(11-05-2009, 08:12 PM)Bring4th_Monica Wrote:  Regarding the science in general: Is anyone tracking the science in the Law of One to see which elements are getting validated in the mainstream world?

I think this is a primary theme of David Wilcock's work and his web site.
re: multiple planes/dimensions
(11-05-2009, 08:56 PM)ubergud Wrote:  Regardless of the 'physics', this has the conceptual merit of being:
1. consistent with a veil being in place
2. consistent with information regarding differences in perception associated with both each entities unique perception of 'reality' based on how much 'channel intermingling' an entity is able to perceive.
3. consistent with the idea of oneness and non-oneness being an illusion.
Thanks for pointing out some of the implications.

re: Ya get what yer lookin' fer
Quote:Here is a related reference from llresearch transcripts [The Law of One, Book V, Session 84, Fragment 43].
Not just in this passage, but throughout the Law of One material, I see several quotes on this theme. They describe how the subconscious expectations of a contactee can determine the nature of the contact. In Secrets, there's even the mention that if a contactee of positive entities expects a medical exam, they'll be given one, but as gently as possible consistent with their expectation.

And a chuckle from Ra in session 53:
Quote:We may note that in a universe of unending unity the concept of a “close encounter” is humorous, for are not all encounters of a nature of self with self? Therefore, how can any encounter be less than very, very close?

re: media concealment
Quote:what to believe, what to believe ... or sometimes what not to believe ... always our choice ...
Ra seems to be a big fan of whatever mystery helps to support free will.

Whenever I see "Law of Confusion" in the Ra text, my mind brings up the photography term "Circle of Confusion." This is the area that is still fuzzy, rather than perfectly focused to an infinitely precise point, no matter how good your lens is or how accurately it is focused. Perfectly sharp film or sensors, if they existed, would still give a fuzzy image because of the way the light goes through the lens. I try to bring my own circle of confusion into a smaller spot of fuzz, but there is still that area that's ambiguous... and it's bigger than I'd like.

Re: scary bad news is a tool for manipulation
Quote:And so ... the truth shall set you free?
Absolutely! Ra and Wilcock both discuss this quite a bit.

re: prophecies of doom are just one outcome that can be changed
Quote:Positivity ... shared hope/belief [i.e. not armegeddon, but forgiveness, acceptance, equanimity, etc.?] :-)
This is exactly the way I see it.

re: the whole thing is just made up or imagined
Quote:I think 500 monkeys banging on keyboards coming up with the entire works of shakespeare by accident would be almost as likely
OK, I'll put you into the "true believer" category and throw away the skeptic's notebook here. Won't be needing that! Big Grin

Quote:Interesting...

Peace, Love and Joy as you desire it!
I desire all those in abundance, thanks for the offer and I'm happy to accept!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-06-2009, 01:30 PM,
#6
RE: Unbelievable moonbases and wrong science
Hey Questioner, and everyone,

This has been a topic of growing interest for me, not so much any longer about Moon bases per se, but the approach that many other-selves have taken to such things. In the thread about Carla's challenge we discussed this a bit and I was honestly quite surprised when I learned that several accept the Moon base information as literally true. I wish to state at this point that I mean this with as little judgment as possible- I have infinite respect for each and every one and what they hold to be true. Our very reality is subjective and can't be taken TOO seriously. Having said this, it is my belief that information given about moon bases (and related transient information) came as a result of de-tuning of the contact.

I present this post with the intent of light-hearted debate. I do not wish to "prove" anyone wrong or win some sort of debate competition. I do feel it is a worthwhile discussion however in light of the fact that many new members are coming to the forum who may not know much about the esoteric, channeling or TLOO at all, and may find the material as equally confusing as I did when I first read it. I simply wish to present my viewpoint, while hopefully gaining insight in to others' viewpoints.

Allow me to quote from Book V of the Law of One, messages from Jim and Carla that preceed the (infamous?) moon base session (I will bold portions that I feel are important)

The Law of One, Book V, Session 8, Fragment 3 - January 26, 1981 Wrote:Jim: Early in the Ra contact we received answers to our questions which fell into a controversial portion of our third-density illusion. Almost everyone, at some point within the study of the paranormal, spends some time being fascinated by the so-called “conspiracy theories” which have generally to do with the supposedly unseen groups and individuals who are said to be the real powers behind governments and their activities in the world today. Such theories usually hold that the news reports that we hear and read concerning politics, economics, the military, and so forth are but the tip of a very large iceberg that has mainly to do with various schemes for world domination and which function through the secret activities of this small, elite group of human beings and their alien allies.

The following information falls into this category and resulted from a follow-up question Don asked about UFOs and their sources. You will note Don’s incredulous attitude throughout this portion of his questioning. It was our decision to remove this information from Book One of The Law of One because we felt it to be entirely unimportant and of a transient nature since knowing it adds nothing to one’s ability or desire to seek the truth and the nature of the evolutionary process, whether the information is true or not. In fact, knowing and continuing to seek this kind of information can become a major stumbling block to one’s spiritual journey because it removes one’s attention from the eternal truths which may serve anyone’s journey—at any time—and places it upon that which is only of fleeting interest and of little use spiritually. Concentrating on conspiracy theories and their participants tends to reinforce the illusion of separation and ignores the love that binds all things as One Being. If we had continued to pursue this particular line of questioning, or any other line of questioning of a transient nature, we would soon have lost the contact with those of Ra because, as Ra mentioned in the very first session, Ra communicated with us through a “narrow band” of vibration or wave length.

Through various clues that Ra gave us when Don asked about the alignments at the end of each session, we were able to determine that this “narrow band” meant that only information of the purest and most precise nature concerning the process of the evolution of mind, body, and spirit could be successfully transmitted on a sustainable basis through our instrument. To ask Ra questions of a transient nature would be like trying to run a finely-tuned engine on crude petroleum.

Many groups become fascinated with transient information of a specific, mundane nature and have their information polluted by negative entities who gradually replace the positive entities that began their contact. Pursuing information of this kind is like moving the dial on your radio so that you end up with another station altogether from the one with which you began. This change in desire for the kind of information that the group seeks from its contact is the signal to that contact that what it has to offer is no longer desired, and the Law of Free Will requires that only hints of this de-tuning process be given to the group so that all choices that the group makes are totally a product of its free will. When a group continues to seek the transient information, the positive contact gives hints here and there that such information is not of importance, but when the group persists in seeking this kind of information, the positive contact, in order to observe the free will of the group, must slowly withdraw and is then eventually replaced by a negative contact which is only too happy to give this kind of information, but with less desire for accuracy and with maximal desire to remove the group from the ranks of those who serve others. When the group has been discredited by false information—such as dates of future disasters which are publicized by the group and then do not occur—then the negative entities have been successful in removing the power of the group’s light and have gathered it for themselves.

We still feel that this information is totally unimportant, and the only reason that we include it now is to show how easy it is for a group to get off the track, shall we say, and to lose the focus of desire for that which is important and that with which the group began: the desire to serve others by gathering information which may aid in the evolution of mind, body, and spirit. Ten thousand years from now it will not matter one whit who did what to whom on this tiny speck of whirling dust. All that will matter is that love may be found at any time in every person and particle of the one creation, or any illusion thereof. Hopefully information gained through any effort such as the Ra contact will help some other third-density entities to discover more of that truth and to move one step further on their evolutionary journey to the one Creator.

Carla: All I can add to this is a plea to all official sources: we do not know anything, we are not in on any conspiracies, and please, please don’t tap our telephones … again! When Don and I joined Andrija Puharich for a mind-link in 1977, we caught the attention of some agency who played havoc with our telephone system. And how utterly without use to listen in to our converse! Mystics seldom plot! We honestly don’t care about this stuff, and just stumbled into it by accident.

I’d like to point out the way those of Ra seem here somewhat off-balance compared to their usual steady selves. It is subtle, but easy to see—the opening to each answer is normally “I am Ra.” Several times in this fragment, however, that signature is missing. The contact was going slightly out of tune here, I think, due to the information’s transient nature.

I pretty much feel the same as Jim and Carla here. It's worth mention that Jim makes it clear that he does not know if the information is true or not, granted. But I think Carla sums it up nicely at the end of the text, that the contact was very likely simply going out of tune.

This brings me to what is catching my interest lately with this topic, that others feel that the moon base information (when I say this I also wish to encompass ocean bases, and sky bases) is literally true. My question is, why? Especially when the information is not central at all to spiritual development?

Is it worth making mention that there is a growing number of people who hold their own spiritual text as literally true, that is, the Bible? And the implications being the belief in a 6000 year old universe, among other things? The similarity is that the both the Bible and the Law of One books lay their respective claims in writing, and both books have "other worldly" origins (for lack of better words). Does this elevate the information therein so high as to become irrefutable? Or could it be more plausible that the universe is not 6000 years old, or that there are not bases on the moon, but merely that what is written in each book is not correct (for whatever reason)? Why does the 'literally true' interpretation hold such validity?

Is it wise to hold ANY source of information as 100% accurate, literally true?

I seek to understand your position, other-selves. In all honesty, I would rather believe the information given than not believe. For one it would be pretty freaking cool. For two, it would make it much easier to consider that TLOO information contained absolutely no distortions.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-06-2009, 09:00 PM,
#7
RE: Unbelievable moonbases and wrong science
Just some thoughts about why I don't have a problem with Ra's information.

1) I find their explanation of how the US gained the technology plausible:

Session 8 Wrote:8.6 Questioner: How did the United States learn the technology to build these craft?

Ra: I am Ra. There was a mind/body/spirit complex known to your people by the vibratory sound complex, Nikola. This entity departed the illusion and the papers containing the necessary understandings were taken by mind/body/spirit complexes serving your security of national divisional complex. Thus your people became privy to the basic technology. In the case of those mind/body/spirit complexes which you call Russians, the technology was given from one of the Confederation in an attempt, approximately twenty-seven of your years ago, to share information and bring about peace among your peoples. The entities giving this information were in error, but we did many things at the end of this cycle in attempts to aid your harvest from which we learned the folly of certain types of aid. That is a contributing factor to our more cautious approach at this date, even as the need is power upon power greater, and your peoples’ call is greater and greater.

Given the involvement of security forces, it seems reasonable that the technology would be hidden rather than shared.

2) Nick Cook's book The Hunt for Zero Point details how the US imported Nazi secrecy measures at the same time that we imported massive amounts of their technology.

3) The disguising of the Burbank, California Lockheed plant during WWII gives an idea of what clever, determined people can do. See http://www.amazingposts.com/2008/08/world-war-ii-lockheed-burbank-aircraft.html and http://www.flatrock.org.nz/topics/flying/the_disguise_of_california.htm

4) I have a link to the Navy's Clementine images that seems to show a rectangular something on the moon. The site isn't working currently so I can't verify that the link is still good, but I will attach the image below (click to enlarge).

5) Tom Bearden, at his website http://www.cheniere.org, gives lots and lots of information about scalar weapons. I couldn't quickly find a good summary there, but there is one here. Some relevant quotes:
"We have a new weapon, just within the portfolio of our scientists, so to speak, which is so powerful that, if unrestrainedly used, it could wipe out all life on earth. It is a fantastic weapon." Khrushchev, to the Presidium, Jan. 1960.
"Others [terrorists] are engaging even in an eco-type of terrorism whereby they can alter the climate, set off earthquakes, volcanoes remotely through the use of electromagnetic waves... So there are plenty of ingenious minds out there that are at work finding ways in which they can wreak terror upon other nations...It's real, and that's the reason why we have to intensify our [counter terrorism] efforts." - Defense Secretary William Cohen, 1997


Attached Files Thumbnail(s)
   
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-06-2009, 09:58 PM,
#8
RE: Unbelievable moonbases and wrong science
Wow, that's an amazing undertaking in Burbank, I didn't know they did that! That's very impressive!

I will have to take a look at some of those other links after the weekend passes, they look to be very interesting.

I can at least comment on the attached image now though, it seems to me to most likely be an artifact of digital image compression. The image itself is fairly distorted in other ways to suggest this (blobby areas where detail is low, and evenly spaced horizontal bars of lighter areas (which is some other form of distortion unrelated to compression actually, not sure what they are)). Using the non-functional link you posted I was able to extract longitude and latitude coordinates out of the URL for that location on the moon (-2 lat & 311 long) and put them in to the "google moon" site to find the same location but at a higher resolution (also compared neighboring craters & landforms to make sure it was the right spot):

http://www.google.com/moon/#lat=-3.316018&lon=49.877929&zoom=6&map=visible&apollo=&q=lat%20-2%20long%20311

In this cleaner image the artifact (or possible base) is not present. If we put aside the possibility that it is compression related we could perhaps speculate that NASA and/or Google have digitally painted the base out. But I would draw attention to the scale key at the bottom of the google page. If the base is real in the first image, it's at least 25-30 miles long. For reference, that's about 25-30 times bigger than Area 51 in Nevada:

http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=area+51&sll=34.171996,-118.10432&sspn=0.012143,0.012403&ie=UTF8&hq=Area+51&hnear=Area+51,+Nevada&ll=37.238939,-115.784569&spn=0.12491,0.209255&t=h&z=13

Love and light,
L.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-09-2009, 01:16 PM, (This post was last modified: 11-10-2009, 10:42 AM by sos.)
#9
RE: Unbelievable moonbases and wrong science
(11-06-2009, 01:30 PM)Lavazza Wrote:  In the thread about Carla's challenge we discussed this a bit and I was honestly quite surprised when I learned that several accept the Moon base information as literally true. I wish to state at this point that I mean this with as little judgment as possible- I have infinite respect for each and every one and what they hold to be true. Our very reality is subjective and can't be taken TOO seriously. Having said this, it is my belief that information given about moon bases (and related transient information) came as a result of de-tuning of the contact.

I do agree that it is a possibility that this information is innacurate due to detuning, but I have never felt that that was actually the case. Although I agree that it is very hazardous to the integrity of the information for a channeler to dwell on or repeatedly seek information of a transient quality, that doesn't mean that some sinister and very dark things aren't actually happening in the cosmos. I am not trying to be argumentative or judgmental either, but of all the mind-boggling things told in the Ra contact, I have a much easier time accepting moon bases than some of the other things, such as almost everything said about the pyramids, the Easter Island moai being 60,000 years old and created at a distance by thought (this is almost 100% refutable, or so it seems), Uranus being a planet moving through all the densities, and a 75000 year old cataclysm on Mars that destroyed a technologically advanced civilization (is there no evidence of this being seen by the probes that are there now?). But despite all that, I guess that I've always had a basic sort of faith in the integrity of the Ra information, and this includes the improbable moon bases.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-09-2009, 01:42 PM,
#10
RE: Unbelievable moonbases and wrong science
(11-09-2009, 01:16 PM)sos Wrote:  I do agree that it is a possibility that this information is innacurate due to detuning, but I have never felt that that was actually the case. Although I agree that it is very hazardous to the integrity of the information for a channeler to dwell on or repeatedly seek information of a transient quality, that doesn't mean that some sinister and very dark things aren't actually happening in the cosmos. I am not all trying to be argumentative or judgmental either, but of all the mind-boggling things told in the Ra contact, I have a much easier time accepting moon bases than some of the other things, such as almost everything to do with the pyramids, the Easter Island moai being 60,000 years old and created at a distance by thought (this is almost 100% refutable, or so it seems), Uranus being a planet moving through all the densities, and a 75000 year old cataclysm on Mars that destroyed a technologically advanced civilization (is there no evidence of this being seen by the probes that are there now?). But despite all that, I guess that I've always had a basic sort of faith in the integrity of the Ra information, and this includes the improbable moon bases.

Well said, sos. I basically hold all of the other examples you've cited at arms length also.

The whole topic has been an interesting catalyst for me over the last few months actually. I came to a short and somewhat obvious realization as I walked to my car after work yesterday, that I can actually really "prove" or "know for sure" of very little. Almost nothing, as it turns out. All I really "know" is what seems to work well for living my life, living what I consider to be a "good" life. I guess that's the only reason I continue to pay attention to the Ra information, it offers what I consider to be the most reasonable and logical worldview. Although there are aspects of even this that don't make much sense to me and I am beginning to chose to ignore completely.

I will note that my realization also must permit that all the unbelievable could in fact be true.

My best course for navigating the esoteric then has become to look at all sources. Evaluate with the heart first, then see where they intersect or pass by each other as a means of evaluating with my mind. Even if this process leads me to believe things that are not true, I will at least be assured that I am following what is best for my personal evolution.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-09-2009, 03:53 PM,
#11
RE: Unbelievable moonbases and wrong science
I know what you mean, and I agree. Since the early 80s, I have strayed from the Law of One material several times, but I've always come back to it. It has a sanctity and a "ring of truth" to it that I find irresistible. I have read a tremendous amount of other channeled material, and I really believe that 90% of the other stuff is just not worth pursuing, and I hope I say that with discernment rather than judgmentalism. Yet at the same time, the Ra Material does have that sensationally glamorous aspect to it that really makes one wonder.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-09-2009, 03:53 PM, (This post was last modified: 11-09-2009, 03:56 PM by Monica.)
#12
RE: Unbelievable moonbases and wrong science
Has anyone read Richard Hoagland's Dark Mission? My hubby and I are reading it right now. It deals with the moon base issue and he makes a very good case for it. I had previously seen his presentation about the Mars ruins at NASA and it was very compelling. I particularly like the elements of hyperdimensional physics and the geometry of the ruins...coincides with Nassim Haramein's work. I find it not only plausible but that it corroborates the Law of One.

Dark Mission: The Secret History of NASA

http://www.amazon.com/Dark-Mission-History-Enlarged-Revised/dp/1932595481/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1257796158&sr=1-2

Note: Be sure to get the updated 2009 edition.
(11-09-2009, 03:53 PM)sos Wrote:  ...the Ra Material does have that sensationally glamorous aspect to it that really makes one wonder.

Interesting...when I first read your post, my mind inserted a 'not' and I read 'does not have that sensationally glamorous aspect' and found myself agreeing with you! Then I realized my mistake!

I find the other channeled sources to be much more 'glamorous' and the Law of One to be without hype...just sure and steady and full of substance.

But I guess it all depends on what we might consider glamorous! Tongue
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-09-2009, 05:01 PM, (This post was last modified: 11-10-2009, 10:45 AM by sos.)
#13
RE: Unbelievable moonbases and wrong science
(11-09-2009, 03:53 PM)Bring4th_Monica Wrote:  Interesting...when I first read your post, my mind inserted a 'not' and I read 'does not have that sensationally glamorous aspect' and found myself agreeing with you! Then I realized my mistake!

I find the other channeled sources to be much more 'glamorous' and the Law of One to be without hype...just sure and steady and full of substance.

But I guess it all depends on what we might consider glamorous! Tongue

What I was trying to say didn't come out right at all. My apologies. I do not find the material to be pretentious or intentionally glamorous. In fact, it's just the opposite, and that has been largely what has drawn me to it. I only meant that I was blown away by all of it, sometimes to the point of overload, it seemed. But as to Hoagland, I have read all of his books, and I still do not know what to make of him. He is either a true courageous whistleblower, or he is seriously delusional. I honestly do not know which.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-09-2009, 06:08 PM, (This post was last modified: 11-10-2009, 08:37 PM by Monica.)
#14
RE: Unbelievable moonbases and wrong science
(11-09-2009, 05:01 PM)sos Wrote:  What I was trying to say didn't come out right at all. My apologies. I do not find the material to be pretentious or intentionally glamorous. In fact, it's just the opposite, and that has been largely what has drawn me to it. I only meant that I was blown away by all of it, sometimes to the point of overload, it seemed.

No prob! I feel the same way about it.

(11-09-2009, 05:01 PM)sos Wrote:  But as to Hoagland, I have read all of his books, and I still do not know what to make of him. He is either a true courageous whistleblower, or he is severely misguided. I honestly do not know which.

I don't know either whether all his conclusions are correct. I think he's at his best when he deals with tangible physics and math...like the geometry of the monuments and the planets, etc. - I find that stuff brilliant! But that might be a topic for another thread! For now, I mainly want to point out that the whole idea of moon bases isn't so far-fetched...I find his premise that the population was deemed 'not ready' for the knowledge of ET's entirely plausible...even today, if there were Disclosure, I can think of some people whom I know would probably freak out!

Hoagland makes a plausible case of it, and does a pretty good job of backing it up, imo. Without ever referencing the Law of One, to my knowledge. Whenever there are whistleblowers out there as intelligent as Hoagland, that is reason enough to consider the possibility that there might be something to it! My main point being that what may seem at first glance to be 'wrong' science might actually be cutting-edge science that's just not yet recognized by the mainstream.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-09-2009, 06:21 PM,
#15
RE: Unbelievable moonbases and wrong science
(11-09-2009, 06:08 PM)Bring4th_Monica Wrote:  My main point being that what may seem at first glance to be 'wrong' science might actually be cutting-edge science that's just not yet recognized by the mainstream.

Along those lines, I think it's interesting how the quotes from Khrushchev and William Cohen that I posted earlier echo Ra quotes.

Khrushchev Wrote:We have a new weapon, just within the portfolio of our scientists, so to speak, which is so powerful that, if unrestrainedly used, it could wipe out all life on earth. It is a fantastic weapon.

William Cohen Wrote:Others [terrorists] are engaging even in an eco-type of terrorism whereby they can alter the climate, set off earthquakes, volcanoes remotely through the use of electromagnetic waves... So there are plenty of ingenious minds out there that are at work finding ways in which they can wreak terror upon other nations...It's real, and that's the reason why we have to intensify our [counter terrorism] efforts.

Session 8 Wrote:The amount of destruction which is contained in this technology is considerable and the weapons have been used in many cases to alter weather patterns and to enhance the vibratory change which engulfs your planet at this time.

Session 65 Wrote:There are those now experimenting with one of the major weapons of this scenario, that is the so-called psychotronic group of devices which are being experimentally used to cause such alterations in wind and weather as will result in eventual famine. If this program is not countered and proves experimentally satisfactory, the methods in this scenario would be made public. There would then be what those whom you call Russians hope to be a bloodless invasion of their personnel in this and every land deemed valuable. However, the peoples of your culture have little propensity for bloodless surrender.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-09-2009, 10:24 PM,
#16
RE: Unbelievable moonbases and wrong science
I read the Book V, Fragment 3 section and would like to add my observations.

First, I totally agree with Jim and Carla that exploration of conspiracy theories can be a distraction from one's own spiritual evolution. I also agree that even if this excerpt's material is accurate, is is pretty much useless to know it. There is so much else that Ra has to say about service-to-self manipulators that we should not be surprised if there are some covertly manipulating science and government matters for their own schemes.

Second, look more closely at exactly what Ra claims in this session. If one accepts the fundamental premises of the Ra contact at all, then it really shouldn't be that hard to accept this material.

1. "Flying saucer" technologies process electromagnetic radiation. It can be used for transportation, weaponry, and peaceful civilian uses. Weapons applications include disruption of conscious thought processes, and disruption of weather patterns. As far as transportation goes, the technologies can be used to create unmanned, remotely operated vehicles.

2. When extremely advanced technology winds up in the hands of national security forces, military and political leaders tend to keep it secret so it can be a potential surprise weapon and not be known by enemies.

3. Tesla discovered some of this technology and documented his findings. After Tesla's death, some of his documents were seized by U.S. national security forces. There is an ongoing U.S. secret program with this technology.

4. Some of this technology was revealed by channeled sources, and also wound up in the hands of national security forces, this time in Russia.

5. The U.S. program, as of the early 1980's, had about 500 devices and about 1,500 people worldwide. Devices were manufactured inside and outside the U.S. Operations were carried out around the world and also at the moon. Note that Ra didn't specifically say since Don didn't ask, but since these operations included remote controlled devices, the moon operation could well have been unmanned and operated by technicians on the Earth.

6. If the technology was known to most of humanity, it could have far-reaching consequences to improve life in many ways.

I think that pretty much covers it.

Now I've already described my tremendous admiration for Don Elkins, but in this case - and it's the only situation I've found to say this - I think his incredulity was unnecessary.

All of point 1 seems like it would have already been familiar, or a natural next step, from Elkins's existing research as reported in Secrets, or from earlier discussions with Ra. Point 6 is a natural corollary.

Point 2 has been repeatedly proven throughout history, without any need to refer to conspiracy theories.

For point 3, Tesla was discussed more by Ra in later sessions But Tesla was already well known as one of the most advanced and unusual researchers in human history regarding electromagnetic phenomena and devices. Given how Einstein's work led to the Manhattan Project, it shouldn't be a surprise to learn of Tesla's work also used in secret government research.

For point 4: If channeled sources are related to UFO's, and their adventures through history trying to share helpful information with people sometimes didn't work out; then it shouldn't be a surprise to learn of channeled UFO sources sharing UFO technology information that didn't get used helpfully by people.

With multiple operations sites, at least two manufacturing facilities, and presumably some administration capacity, there may be no more than a few dozen people involved with each facility or site. With any secret program, a "need to know" provision is most likely. Each location, therefore, would likely have staff who thought they had the entire program (except for a few coordinators at the top of the pyramid).

These people would likely believe that their jobs involved technology from advanced human scientists, and that the protection of their country depended on the integrity of the program's secrecy.

There are so many admitted, documented examples of secret government programs that it shouldn't be hard to believe national security secrets can be kept well. Look at the Manhattan Project, the Navajo Code Talkers, the Skunk Works, the British breaking of the Enigma code, for that matter the leadup to the American revolution. On and on there is proof that military and political secrets are often kept close for a long time.

I do think it's unlikely that a secret program of manned moon operations could have happened and been sustained without discovery. I also think it's unlikely that visible, tangible, unmanned moon operations could have been covertly carried on all these years.

But remember the descriptions of the UFO phenomenon involving selective visibility based on expectations of observers, and also involving travel jumping from one space/time location to another without travel through intervening space. Together, these could imply that moon operations involve a small number of dedicated people who remotely control teleportation technology, which if seen by bystanders will be explained away spontaneously by the bystander's minds as unbelievable non-evidence.

As I see it, faith in Ra's reports of secret UFO research is not at all necessary. It is possible that the connection was detuned and the information unreliable. But I don't see any good reasons to reject these claims out of hand, or to say that they make the Ra material much harder to believe.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-09-2009, 11:25 PM,
#17
RE: Unbelievable moonbases and wrong science
Great post, Questioner. Thanks for being so thorough.

I want to address the question of Don's incredulity. I think what he was truly amazed by was that such a program could have been kept secret for so long, and secret even from him. My guess is that he prided himself on being well-connected and well-informed (wasn't he in the military before becoming a commercial pilot?) and the idea that he would not have had a hint of such a mind-boggling secret struck him as literally incredible.

Like you, though, I have great respect for the ability of national security forces and others to keep secrets.

The only other point I might quibble with is your point 5, and only because Ra didn't say that the bases, etc, were all part of the US program. Some may be Russian and some from other countries. Or perhaps, I suppose, they could be joint international efforts. Or they could all be American -- we just don't know.

One final thought just occurred to me re: manned moon bases. The British hacker who was recently (or is in the process of being) extradited to the US, Gary Mackinnon, supposedly found records of "off world US non-terrestrial officers" in the military computers he gained access to.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-10-2009, 02:51 AM,
#18
RE: Unbelievable moonbases and wrong science
(11-09-2009, 11:25 PM)βαθμιαίος Wrote:  Great post, Questioner. Thanks for being so thorough.

Thanks.

Quote:I want to address the question of Don's incredulity. I think what he was truly amazed by was that such a program could have been kept secret for so long, and secret even from him. My guess is that he prided himself on being well-connected and well-informed (wasn't he in the military before becoming a commercial pilot?) and the idea that he would not have had a hint of such a mind-boggling secret struck him as literally incredible.

Now that makes a lot more sense to me: that his surprise was not that such things could exist, but that they could have "flown under the radar," so to speak, of his own investigations.

Quote:The only other point I might quibble with is your point 5, and only because Ra didn't say that the bases, etc, were all part of the US program.

Actually, this was asked specifically:

Quote:Questioner: How many of these craft does the United States have?
Ra: I am Ra. The United States has 573 at this time. They are in the process of adding to this number.
....
Q. How many people of United States designation are aware of these craft, including those who operate them?
Ra: I am Ra. The number of your peoples varies, for there are needs to communicate at this particular time/space nexus so that the number is expanding at this time. The approximate number is 1,500. It is only approximate for as your illusory time/space continuum moves from present to present at this nexus many are learning.

So that seems to be U.S. or U.S.-led forces, with "craft" referring to all devices, whether or not for transportation.

Quote:One final thought just occurred to me re: manned moon bases. The British hacker who was recently (or is in the process of being) extradited to the US, Gary Mackinnon, supposedly found records of "off world US non-terrestrial officers" in the military computers he gained access to.

That's an interesting item. I don't know anything about this person or his credibility.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-10-2009, 07:55 AM,
#19
RE: Unbelievable moonbases and wrong science
(11-10-2009, 02:51 AM)Questioner Wrote:  So that seems to be U.S. or U.S.-led forces, with "craft" referring to all devices, whether or not for transportation.

Yeah, I guess I wasn't real clear. I'm trying to point out that this part of your point 5: "Operations were carried out around the world and also at the moon" perhaps belongs in a separate point. Operations are apparently carried out around the world and on the moon; they may or may not all be US operations. Ra originally mentioned "various of your peoples' societal divisions"; it was Don that narrowed the focus to the US. Here's the relevant quote:

Quote:Questioner: Are these craft that are from our peoples from what we call planes that are not incarnate at this time? Where are they based?

Ra: I am Ra. These of which we spoke are of third density and are part of the so-called military complex of various of your peoples’ societal divisions or structures.

The bases are varied. There are bases, as you would call them, undersea in your southern waters near the Bahamas as well as in your Pacific seas in various places close to your Chilean borders on the water. There are bases upon your moon, as you call this satellite, which are at this time being reworked. There are bases which move about your lands. There are bases, if you would call them that, in your skies. These are the bases of your peoples, very numerous and, as we have said, potentially destructive.

Quote:
Quote:One final thought just occurred to me re: manned moon bases. The British hacker who was recently (or is in the process of being) extradited to the US, Gary Mackinnon, supposedly found records of "off world US non-terrestrial officers" in the military computers he gained access to.
That's an interesting item. I don't know anything about this person or his credibility.

I know very little, but a quick googling will give you lots of news stories about him, although of course the mainstream news doesn't go into the whole "off world" thing.
Wiki page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gary_McKinnon
Project Camelot interview: http://www.projectcamelot.org/gary_mckinnon.html
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-10-2009, 11:00 AM,
#20
RE: Unbelievable moonbases and wrong science
If I might break in here a moment, I'd refer back again to Richard Hoagland and what he says. If even half of what he says is true, then therein lies the total explanation of the moon bases cover-up. Now this is diving headlong into totally transient info of a massive conspiracy and cover-up nature in saying the American public has been lied to and deceived on a monumental scale beyond what almost anyone could understand. For that reason and for not wanting to spend too much time there, I tend to shy away from what Hoagland says. Yet at the same time I know for a fact that the public is being lied to and manipulated to at least some degree. If the influence of the 4th density negatives is what Ra says it has been, then it's not that hard to accept. But at the same time, Ra spoke of a tactic of the 4th density negatives as being to cause mistrust and suspicion among the people as to government plots, etc. I have tried for this reason to back away from the conspiracy stuff.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-10-2009, 12:39 PM,
#21
RE: Unbelievable moonbases and wrong science
Gentlemen,

Try as I might, I am still unable to find the concept of various secret bases realistic in the face of everything else I know to be true about the world, and so be it. I hope they are discovered some day, because it would tighten the shoe laces of the Ra material that much more for me were they found. All is as it should be. All is well.

I did want to comment on one thing however,

(11-09-2009, 11:25 PM)βαθμιαίος Wrote:  I want to address the question of Don's incredulity. I think what he was truly amazed by was that such a program could have been kept secret for so long, and secret even from him. My guess is that he prided himself on being well-connected and well-informed (wasn't he in the military before becoming a commercial pilot?) and the idea that he would not have had a hint of such a mind-boggling secret struck him as literally incredible.

(11-10-2009, 02:51 AM)Questioner Wrote:  Now that makes a lot more sense to me: that his surprise was not that such things could exist, but that they could have "flown under the radar," so to speak, of his own investigations.

And it's really just an observation on my part. I am familiar with organized western religions to a degree, and more so with those who read their scripture as every word being (and needing to be) literally true. This causes a lot of trouble because many parts of the bible contradict each other. The solution to this problem often is reinterpreting the words and statements so that the paradoxes are resolved.

Now then, interpreting anything is subjective in itself, there is no absolute right or wrong, so it can be a slippery thing to wrangle with in a debate / discussion. (this is my risk Smile)

However at least from my perspective, the above two quotes, although subjective interpretations in their own right and for all we know perhaps correct, seems to me to be skewing the meaning of what was intended so that it better fits in to pre-existing beliefs. Was Don surprised about being 1-upped by Ra with new information, or just about the information? Is this not obvious...?

Perhaps I could validate Ra's statements about Moon bases by supposing there is an island in the pacific somewhere called "Moon", and that it has a secret military base on it? That would certainly work better for me. But of course I don't suppose that's what Ra was saying when he said "moon bases".

Where do these interpretations stem from, why are they needed? Is there a need (forgive me if I am dead wrong, it looks this way to me) for the Ra contact to be 100% absolutely correct in everything that was communicated, even for the extremely fringe material where 100% accuracy is not needed, i.e. government secrets? It would seem to indicate that if Ra were indeed proven wrong it would mean something detrimental regarding the remaining non-transient information to some? Perhaps instead of adhering to one source for spiritual information as the absolute truth it would be helpful to cast a larger net out in to the spiritual world to see what the rest of creation has to say on the topic?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-10-2009, 06:59 PM,
#22
RE: Unbelievable moonbases and wrong science
(11-10-2009, 12:39 PM)Lavazza Wrote:  Where do these interpretations stem from, why are they needed? Is there a need (forgive me if I am dead wrong, it looks this way to me) for the Ra contact to be 100% absolutely correct in everything that was communicated, even for the extremely fringe material where 100% accuracy is not needed, i.e. government secrets? It would seem to indicate that if Ra were indeed proven wrong it would mean something detrimental regarding the remaining non-transient information to some? Perhaps instead of adhering to one source for spiritual information as the absolute truth it would be helpful to cast a larger net out in to the spiritual world to see what the rest of creation has to say on the topic?

My dear Lavazza,

Thank you for your feedback. I don't feel that I need the Ra information we have been discussing in this thread to be true; I just think that it's likely that it is. Each of us must make our own determinations about what we believe, and I certainly respect your right not to believe this information. I do wonder, though, if perhaps your question could be turned back towards you. Do you by any chance need the information not to be true, perhaps because it might unsettle much of what you believe you know about the world?

With regard to your point about casting a wider net, I have posted some links from the wider world that show that there is evidence to be found that what Ra said might have some validity. I recognize that the claims have not been proven and that we are unlikely to have definitive answers until fourth density comes and the veil is lifted.

In the meantime, I am content to consider Ra's claims as possible/probable vortices while I focus on what I consider to be important in the Law of One material and in life in general: love/light, balance, radiance, acceptance, forgiveness, unity, etc.

Love and light,
βαθμιαίος
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-10-2009, 09:21 PM,
#23
RE: Unbelievable moonbases and wrong science
(11-10-2009, 06:59 PM)βαθμιαίος Wrote:  Thank you for your feedback. I don't feel that I need the Ra information we have been discussing in this thread to be true; I just think that it's likely that it is. Each of us must make our own determinations about what we believe, and I certainly respect your right not to believe this information. I do wonder, though, if perhaps your question could be turned back towards you. Do you by any chance need the information not to be true, perhaps because it might unsettle much of what you believe you know about the world?

It is a good question a valid one, I realize I have come off somewhat strongly on the matter (forgive me) for indeed the topic does haunt me to a degree. I would say rather than requiring the material to be false I instead require it to be true, or at least explainable. In this case I have explained it (to myself) with distortion, but that doesn't cover all of the other fantastical things, some of which sos mentioned. Where does this leave me with regard to TLOO? I am not sure. I honestly don't know where it fits in with my current world view... which is something that's actively evolving at the moment.

(11-10-2009, 06:59 PM)βαθμιαίος Wrote:  In the meantime, I am content to consider Ra's claims as possible/probable vortices while I focus on what I consider to be important in the Law of One material and in life in general: love/light, balance, radiance, acceptance, forgiveness, unity, etc.

That's something I can easily get behind. Smile Cheers to you, βαθμιαίος.

Love and light,
L.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-10-2009, 09:49 PM, (This post was last modified: 11-10-2009, 10:03 PM by Questioner.)
#24
RE: Unbelievable moonbases and wrong science
(11-10-2009, 11:00 AM)sos Wrote:  If I might break in here a moment

It's a conversation, the more the merrier! Cool

I completely agree with you that if both Ra and Hoagland are accurate, then exploration of conspiracies is a distraction from our own spiritual evolution. If we grow into more loving, wise, and balanced entities, we are better equipped to help and influence those around us, whether or not they are involved in any kind of high-tech cover-up.
(11-10-2009, 07:55 AM)βαθμιαίος Wrote:  Operations are apparently carried out around the world and on the moon; they may or may not all be US operations.

Thank you for clarifying that point, and for the references to the other information sites.
(11-10-2009, 09:21 PM)Lavazza Wrote:  I realize I have come off somewhat strongly on the matter (forgive me)

I felt that you provide very gentle, thoughtful and polite contributions to the discussion. No need for any apology at all, as far as I'm concerned.
(11-10-2009, 12:39 PM)Lavazza Wrote:  Where do these interpretations stem from, why are they needed?

What we have here is a mystery that tickles my brain. I like to explore, and where I don't have enough information to know for sure, to find out if other people and I can come close to some realistic guesses. This whole "moon base" excerpt is is all minor, and ultimately irrelevant, as Jim and Carla wrote. If it is true, or not true, or partly true, or misunderstood... none of that makes even 1% difference in my opinion of the L/L Research material about spiritual evolution. You are right on in speculating that my speculations are merely speculative. Wink As you put it, shoelace tying... to mix a metaphor, maybe with a cherry on top.

Quote:Try as I might, I am still unable to find the concept of various secret bases realistic in the face of everything else I know to be true about the world, and so be it.

I wonder if I could ask you a little bit more about this. Does it seem difficult to believe because of the whole technology aspect, the idea that present humanity could have the kind of propulsion systems and energy weapons discussed in the excerpt? Or is it more that the whole area of government secrets is one that doesn't resonate with you? I am not trying to change your point of view, merely to understand it a bit more, if that's OK with you.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-10-2009, 10:31 PM,
#25
RE: Unbelievable moonbases and wrong science
(11-10-2009, 09:21 PM)Lavazza Wrote:  It is a good question a valid one, I realize I have come off somewhat strongly on the matter (forgive me) for indeed the topic does haunt me to a degree. I would say rather than requiring the material to be false I instead require it to be true, or at least explainable. In this case I have explained it (to myself) with distortion, but that doesn't cover all of the other fantastical things, some of which sos mentioned. Where does this leave me with regard to TLOO? I am not sure. I honestly don't know where it fits in with my current world view... which is something that's actively evolving at the moment.

Dear Lavazza,

I would be glad to forgive you, but in fact no forgiveness is necessary. Actually, I'm grateful to you, because I've always wanted to discuss this material in much the way we have done, but never brought it up, partly I think, because I felt sheepish to focus on the transient material.

For some reason, when I read your post, I thought of a quote from session 1, part of which was only discovered during the relistening project. Perhaps it might help you to hold it all a little more lightly, if indeed that's appropriate. (I have italicized the new material.)

Quote:Let us for a moment consider thought. What is it, my friends, to take thought? Took you then thought today? What thoughts did you think today? What thoughts were part of the original thought today? In how many of your thoughts did the creation lie? Was love contained? And was service freely given? You are not part of a material universe. You are part of a thought. You are dancing in a ballroom in which there is no material. You are dancing thoughts.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-10-2009, 10:33 PM, (This post was last modified: 11-10-2009, 11:09 PM by Monica.)
#26
RE: Unbelievable moonbases and wrong science
(11-10-2009, 12:39 PM)Lavazza Wrote:  Gentlemen,

You're not intentionally excluding us ladies, are you? j/k Wink

(11-10-2009, 12:39 PM)Lavazza Wrote:  Try as I might, I am still unable to find the concept of various secret bases realistic in the face of everything else I know to be true about the world

The whole subject of govt. secrets is very volatile, emotionally inflammatory, and makes a lot of people uncomfortable, so you're not alone in that respect. The same is true in areas of politics, diet, religion, etc. As an example, the idea of secret Moon bases is in the same category as the 911 Truth Movement. Most of the people I've spoken to about this find the entire idea so unbelievable that they aren't even willing to review the tangible, forensic evidence. Once they get past that obstacle, though, and actually review the evidence, they marvel at how obvious it was all along. Their view of the world stretches and expands. Likewise, we've all had that happen when we read the Law of One. In my experience, it's an ongoing process.

Since we live in a holographic UniVerse, we each can find the evidence to support or refute whatever we choose to believe. We then think we 'know' what is 'true about the world' but is our version of 'truth' really 'true' or just another facet of an ever-changing kalaidescopic reality?

But I guess that's a topic for another thread...

(11-10-2009, 12:39 PM)Lavazza Wrote:  I hope they are discovered some day, because it would tighten the shoe laces of the Ra material that much more for me were they found.

I understand how you feel! Although I have no issue with the moon bases topic, I have felt that way about other things. In my experience, whenever I had any sort of prerequisite, I usually didn't find it. It was only when I released all attachment to the prerequisite that I got my issue reconciled. That's been my experience, anyway! Paradoxical, eh? Undecided

(11-10-2009, 12:39 PM)Lavazza Wrote:  I did want to comment on one thing however,

(11-09-2009, 11:25 PM)βαθμιαίος Wrote:  I want to address the question of Don's incredulity. I think what he was truly amazed by was that such a program could have been kept secret for so long, and secret even from him. My guess is that he prided himself on being well-connected and well-informed (wasn't he in the military before becoming a commercial pilot?) and the idea that he would not have had a hint of such a mind-boggling secret struck him as literally incredible.

(11-10-2009, 02:51 AM)Questioner Wrote:  Now that makes a lot more sense to me: that his surprise was not that such things could exist, but that they could have "flown under the radar," so to speak, of his own investigations.

And it's really just an observation on my part. I am familiar with organized western religions to a degree, and more so with those who read their scripture as every word being (and needing to be) literally true. This causes a lot of trouble because many parts of the bible contradict each other. The solution to this problem often is reinterpreting the words and statements so that the paradoxes are resolved.

I agree that many people are able to resolve their paradoxes about the Bible by reinterpreting the contradictions so that they no longer contradict. However, is this not because they already have a presupposition that the Bible is 100% infallible and therefore must have resolution to the paradoxes?

As one who has no such foundation of respect for the Bible as a whole (though I do respect many portions of it), I have no presupposition and therefore tend to take the Bible at face value; hence, I find it full of contradictions which, for me, offer no such reconciliation. Since the Bible is not my chosen path, that's ok. My point might be the same as your point...? That whether we are able to reconcile the paradoxes has less to do with the paradoxes themselves and more to do with what our presuppositions are...how much respect we have for the source.

Hence, for me personally, I might be willing to suspend any concerns I may have about certain topics in the Law of One, because of my trust in the source.

Except...the very reason I do have such trust in the source is that I have found virtually NO contradictions! Not any that seemed significant to me, anyway!

I don't find the moon base issue a contradiction at all...and am still very puzzled as to why it might be considered so. We know of recent examples of govt. secrecy. If our govt. is capable of that, then why not moon bases too? I don't find one any more unbelievable than the other.

(11-10-2009, 12:39 PM)Lavazza Wrote:  However at least from my perspective, the above two quotes, although subjective interpretations in their own right and for all we know perhaps correct, seems to me to be skewing the meaning of what was intended so that it better fits in to pre-existing beliefs. Was Don surprised about being 1-upped by Ra with new information, or just about the information? Is this not obvious...?

As we've discovered previously in other discussions, what may be obvious to me might be 'obviously' the opposite to you...and vice versa. Such beautiful diversity!

I respect your point of view! I see it as a valid possibility.

My point of view is different. When I read the following session, I interpret Don's incredulity as being 'obviously' about the govt. having kept the moon bases a secret, not about the info itself...for the following reasons:

1. The idea of bases on the moon aren't any more fantastic than communicating with ET's, asking huge boulders to dance themselves into pyramids, or any of the other myriad amazingly incredible topics offered by Ra....even the existence of Ra themselves!

2. As far as I can tell, the only aspect that makes the idea of moon bases incredible at all is that for this to be true, would mean our govt. has kept it a secret. Therefore, it seems obvious to me that this is what Don found incredible.

3. This is backed up by the sequence of his statements and questions:

Quote:8.7 Questioner: I’m puzzled by these craft which have undersea bases. Is this technology sufficient to overshadow all other armaments? Do we have the ability to just fly in these craft or are they just craft for transport? What is the basic mechanism of their power source? It’s really hard to believe is what I’m saying.

Ra: I am Ra. The craft are perhaps misnamed in some instances. It would be more appropriate to consider them as weaponry. The energy used is that of the field of electromagnetic energy which polarizes the Earth sphere. The weaponry is of two basic kinds: that which is called by your peoples psychotronic and that which is called by your peoples particle beam. The amount of destruction which is contained in this technology is considerable and the weapons have been used in many cases to alter weather patterns and to enhance the vibratory change which engulfs your planet at this time.

8.8 Questioner: How have they been able to keep this a secret? Why aren’t these craft in use for transport?

Ra: The governments of each of your societal division illusions desire to refrain from publicity so that the surprise may be retained in case of hostile action from what your peoples call enemies.

Note the bold. If you remove Ra's statements in the middle, Don went from saying he found it hard to believe, to his next utterance, asking how the govt. kept it a secret. I think that's an important clue as to what was on his mind.

That's just my interpretation, For what it's worth.

(11-10-2009, 12:39 PM)Lavazza Wrote:  Where do these interpretations stem from, why are they needed? Is there a need (forgive me if I am dead wrong, it looks this way to me) for the Ra contact to be 100% absolutely correct in everything that was communicated, even for the extremely fringe material where 100% accuracy is not needed, i.e. government secrets? It would seem to indicate that if Ra were indeed proven wrong it would mean something detrimental regarding the remaining non-transient information to some? Perhaps instead of adhering to one source for spiritual information as the absolute truth it would be helpful to cast a larger net out in to the spiritual world to see what the rest of creation has to say on the topic?

I think it depends on the person and how much the info resonates with them. For me, I had already cast a wide net, in a lot of other studies, before I even read the Law of One (as I'm sure many of us did). Whether that's the reason for the high degree of resonance or not, I couldn't say. All I know is that I had a high degree of resonance with it...probably about 99%. So I never felt a need to seek out confirmation elsewhere, other than an isolated incident in which I prayed for guidance (when I first started reading the books and was in the process of letting go of my Biblical dogma), and I saw a perfect UFO shape in the clouds...this was just a nice added touch, though...I was already resonating so much with it that by that time I didn't really need the confirmation...It's sort of like the old cliche, "How do you know when you meet Mr or Ms Right?" and the answer, "When you no longer even ask the question."

Again, that was just my own personal experience, and I realize that not everyone here at B4 has the same exact level of trust or resonance as I do. That's ok! It has just added to the resonance factor that our Confederation friends are so respectful of our free wills and encourage us to discard that which doesn't resonate!

So, in light of that, my question is: If a certain element doesn't resonate, in this case the moon bases, why even mess with it? why not just discard it altogether? Why seek confirmation or refutation elsewhere by 'casting a wider net?'

It seems that the reason to cast a wider net would be because something about the controversial issue is found to be intriguing...could it be that there is an emotional charge about it?

Whenever I feel a strong emotional charge about something, I usually find that there is something about it that I fear. When I first started researching the 911 coverup, I felt a strong emotional charge...and I felt compelled to dig deeper and deeper. As they say, how deep does the rabbit hole go?

I dug deep enough to satisfy certain key questions...and then decided to quit digging.

In the case of the moon bases, there is also a deep hole. Just do a search on youtube and you'll find plenty to keep busy! Just Richard Hoagland's work alone is very compelling! Plausible at the very least! But there is so much more? Ex-NASA scientists blowing the whistle...many of whom appear reputable...

At the very least, I think there is enough out there to add credibility to Ra's account. Does it conclusively prove that Ra was correct? No. But neither does it refute it. As they say, you can't prove a negative!

What I'm suggesting is: Rather than trying to prove Ra's assertion one way or the other, perhaps it might be more fruitful to dig into the question of why the issue has an emotional charge at all...why is it intriguing? why is it an obstacle? why is it even an issue worth digging into?

Just some ideas to consider!

Having said all that, I admit I am still curious why you think the idea of moon bases contradicts what you 'know about the world.' Is it because you don't think NASA would have covered it up, or because you don't think NASA could have covered it up?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-12-2009, 06:55 AM,
#27
RE: Unbelievable moonbases and wrong science
I saw incredible pictures about the moon with a doom that was shining out a blue light. The structure was clearly not natural. Remember the testimony from one of the early astronauts who said that there were bright lights and ufo's up there (moon) and behaving like tourists. Well, http://www.theorionconspiracy.com/html/lunar_civilisations.html is showing these. Strange, exactly what that astonaut was telling. It is obvious that orionconspiracy has great connections within some organisations like NASA.
Remember also the blue beam that came from the bottom of the moon and reached to the spaceshuttle that exploded years ago (with that teacher). Was this distroyed by a laserbeam ? The situatuion is that 'someone' was up there.
If you know the interview projectcamelot.org with Biriska from Russia, the boy stated that MARS was also manned and this has been confirmed by other whistleblowers who doesn't hide their face and name. So why not on the moon ? Still so many people does not believe that the moon is manned. The movements on the moon from flashlights to real movement has been noticed since at least late 1700. And still... so many choose to believe a TV. Not a person talking on TV but the TV itself like it has become a living entity. Have noticed this in my hometown.
There is so much to say about the moon, who said what and to compair this with other statements such from RA.
The bombing on the moon is still a puzzle to me. If there was no explosion to see, how deep went the bomb than ? And in what ?
For myself, there is no doubt about the possibility of a manned moon. It just is. Enough pictures from NASA that prooves the existance of lost cultures on MARS and the MOON. Also video that show movement on the moon (flyover by ufo's). Many are manmade. Black OPS have even a cilinder-ufo like those that has been photographed since the early cameras.
Be aware and you'll grow Rolleyes
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-13-2009, 12:34 PM, (This post was last modified: 11-13-2009, 12:38 PM by Lavazza.)
#28
RE: Unbelievable moonbases and wrong science
(11-10-2009, 09:49 PM)Questioner Wrote:  I wonder if I could ask you a little bit more about this. Does it seem difficult to believe because of the whole technology aspect, the idea that present humanity could have the kind of propulsion systems and energy weapons discussed in the excerpt? Or is it more that the whole area of government secrets is one that doesn't resonate with you? I am not trying to change your point of view, merely to understand it a bit more, if that's OK with you.

Well, to be fair I should say that as strongly as I have argued that such things as moon bases do not exist I ultimately do not know. And as I do think UFOs exist, certainly the technology in theory allows for it if humans have become privy. I may have mentioned this before but it bears repeating in light of our discussion.

The biggest block I have with the moon base idea is that if it were indeed true, many other things would not be true. I explored this a little bit in the Carla thread, which I'll dig up:

Lavazza, re: "understanding Carlas challenge thread, post #52 Wrote:So, with all of those responses in mind, can we extend the same plausibility towards moon bases? The problem and (one of) the key differences is that I see is that it is not beyond our ability to disprove. We can't go back in time to examine Venus as it was during Ra's hayday, but we can look at the moon, and indeed even the dark side of the moon. Where are the bases? Subterranean moon bases then? Cloaking device hidden bases? Even those things might be possible, but what is the more likely explanation? That the government is hiding super futuristic, amazingly high-tech capabilities and has special bases on the moon or under the oceans, or that the comment made by Ra (for whatever reason, confusion, distortion, fill in the blank) was not correct? Or lets examine the logical errors, if we have what I would call such high technology as to have secret bases on the moon, why are we still pouring billions of dollars in to space shuttle technology at NASA? Or the ISS (international space station)? With a government that gets sooo caught up with money problems when it comes to balancing the budget or passing new bills, providing health care, etc. does it make any sense at all to continue funding obsolete space technology? The implications of the government having moon bases are so large and so far reaching... the only way they could possibly exist is a government cover-up so far reaching and widespread, and so fundamentally top secret as to be only possible in a work of fiction.

I mention a few things here but lets take what might be the biggest elephant in the thread, that is, money. Should we suppose a base to exist on the moon, it would mean that whoever or whatever part of the government built it did it unbeknownst to the rest of the government. Is this why NASA continues then to be funded with millions and billions of dollars, even while our national debt is rising, we're funding two unsustainable wars abroad, facing the largest economic meltdown since the great depression, not to mention trying to pass an almost 1-trillion dollar health care bill? So it must be a conspiracy of a large magnitude? How much do you suppose a moon base costs... surely it's at least in the tens of billions? How about hundreds of billions? And then we need to pay to keep it's existence a secret by whatever means... As we know there are many "watchdog" groups that monitor the governments activities, and especially so with money.

(now to be fair, I just remembered this: http://benfrank.net/patriots/news/national/pentagon_missing_trillions which may compromise my last argument, lol! (see, I <b>am</b> trying... Wink))

How about we should look at the fact that such a moon base would have been built and maintained without anyone's knowledge. NASA is not the only space organization in the world, most large nations have their own. I will have to find the article, but the Japanese did a satellite flyby of the moon last year or the year before, taking ultra-high res images of the surface ("dark side" included). Millions of telescopes around the world from amateur astronomers point at the moon everyday on top of this. I find the idea that it could be so easily concealed implausible to the extreme (much less a base in our skies).

These are two things we could mull over first.

Monica Wrote:You're not intentionally excluding us ladies, are you? j/k Wink

Nay Smile Welcome aboard!

Monica Wrote:Since we live in a holographic UniVerse, we each can find the evidence to support or refute whatever we choose to believe. We then think we 'know' what is 'true about the world' but is our version of 'truth' really 'true' or just another facet of an ever-changing kalaidescopic reality?

May be that you are correct, I can't say for sure, but there is such a thing as consensus reality that we all participate in to some degree. For example, we all agree that gravity pushes us down toward Earth, that the United States exists, and that dogs like chasing Frisbees. My point being, some things are, at least in our reality, true regardless of what someone else may think. I think?

Monica Wrote:I understand how you feel! Although I have no issue with the moon bases topic, I have felt that way about other things. In my experience, whenever I had any sort of prerequisite, I usually didn't find it. It was only when I released all attachment to the prerequisite that I got my issue reconciled. That's been my experience, anyway! Paradoxical, eh?

This is good solid advice if you ask me.

Monica Wrote:I don't find the moon base issue a contradiction at all...and am still very puzzled as to why it might be considered so. We know of recent examples of govt. secrecy. If our govt. is capable of that, then why not moon bases too? I don't find one any more unbelievable than the other.

I agree that the existence of UFOs, ETs, etc. at least permit the idea of moon bases. The thing is though, I'm not so certain the government is very good at concealing truths at all. Consider the UFO phenomenon, despite half a century of denial there is still a large and ever growing group of people who are hell bent on disclosure. Same goes for anything else that falls under conspiracy labels. If the government was so able to keep secrecy why are there conspiracies at all? They wouldn't be there... the government is a huge machine, but it's still run by people who make mistakes or decide to tell secrets, or whathaveyou. I haven't investigated this Hoagland person, but who else is speaking about this? Many people? Are as many people discussing moon bases as are people discussing UFOs or WTC conspiracies? (I will investigate youtube as you suggested)

Monica Wrote:So, in light of that, my question is: If a certain element doesn't resonate, in this case the moon bases, why even mess with it? why not just discard it altogether? Why seek confirmation or refutation elsewhere by 'casting a wider net?'
Monica Wrote:What I'm suggesting is: Rather than trying to prove Ra's assertion one way or the other, perhaps it might be more fruitful to dig into the question of why the issue has an emotional charge at all...why is it intriguing? why is it an obstacle? why is it even an issue worth digging into?

This is something that's an active catalyst for me at the moment. I do not know how others are able to make peace with something like this so easily, especially considering the highly esoteric nature of the Ra contact. To help with understanding my quagmire, imagine that you're reading the Ra material one day and all of a sudden your eyes fall upon a passage you never noticed before. It reads: "I am Ra. Hello LOO reader. We just wanted to let you know that if you open your left hand, you will find a shiny green M&M courtesy of your friendly local social memory complex. Adonai, Adonai." In many ways, this scenario with the M&M is about equal to the statement about moon, ocean, and sky(?) bases (and to perhaps a lesser extent, pyramids, maldak, and so on). At least, that's how I see it at the moment.

Put simply, I'm attempting to make sense of how to accept information from an un-seen source when said source has given information that I know is (or at least strongly, strongly suspect) not true.

May well be that I have not fully mastered the art of 'putting it aside'. I do not hold any being as superior to myself or anyone else, so I cannot give Ra any more superiority than old Fred who hangs out at the bar on Wednesdays. I equate a conversation with Fred as in some ways equal to a conversation with Ra, in the sense that if Fred starting talking about neon pink gnomes that live in his attic and heckle him in the night, I might question anything else he has to say as well. (this is why I seek explanations (i.e. distortion) for moon base comments)

Often of late I have mentally pulled back so to speak, and looked at the entire package of information offered by Ra in perspective. When I get right down to it, although helpful at times, there is nothing included there that I <b>need</b> for my spiritual evolution. In that sense, it may be wiser on my part to take the whole thing less seriously. Indeed it was certainly my wish to take the Ra material seriously that created the emotional charge / catalyst for me in the first place.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-13-2009, 01:00 PM,
#29
RE: Unbelievable moonbases and wrong science
Good Greetings:

Cloaking devices are in existence. The Miltitary has them. The moon bases are cloaked with an energy signature that makes them invisible to us... unless we are looking with our minds not eyes.

The original builders of theses bases were the Draconians and the Greys. The bases are used for two things... creating hybrid bodies and clones and to change the spin of the Earth and Lunar cycle. Ever wonder why there are so many Vampire myths concerning full moons... All of the truth exists in the myths.

Love--

fairyfarmgirl
Quote this message in a reply
11-13-2009, 05:50 PM,
#30
RE: Unbelievable moonbases and wrong science
(11-13-2009, 01:00 PM)fairyfarmgirl Wrote:  Cloaking devices are in existence. The Miltitary has them. The moon bases are cloaked with an energy signature that makes them invisible to us... unless we are looking with our minds not eyes.

That's so Star Trek! Wink Ha. But it definitely sounds plausible to me!

(11-13-2009, 01:00 PM)fairyfarmgirl Wrote:  The original builders of theses bases were the Draconians and the Greys. The bases are used for two things... creating hybrid bodies and clones and to change the spin of the Earth and Lunar cycle.

What is this assertion based on?

(11-13-2009, 01:00 PM)fairyfarmgirl Wrote:  Ever wonder why there are so many Vampire myths concerning full moons... All of the truth exists in the myths.

True...but there are also many positive associations with the Moon...Pagans have utmost reverence for the magickal powers of the Moon...the Moon as being reflective of our inner psyche...shadow self...mystical self...enhanced mystical perceptions, more profound dreams...feminine wisdom...so many myths and energies associated with the Moon.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)